Words, its use and factuality
NB1100
Explorer
Hi all,
"Not to mention" is known to be a kind of apophasis.
Definition of apophasis according to dictionary.com: denial of one's intention to speak of a subject that is at the same time named or insinuated
Examples:
The costs, not to mention the risks, of transporting the telescope to and from space would have been excessive.
I shall not mention Caesar's avarice, nor his cunning, nor his morality.
The criteria for deciding what is worth saying
[1] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[2] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[3] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.
[4] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[5] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[6] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings."
— MN 58
There is no doubt "Not to mention" is not to be taken literally but if we look at it from the angle of right speech, can this be considered as factual or true? Can you share your thoughts? Thanks.
Comments
Not to mention is merely a 'turn of phrase' used to underscore or emphasise the significance of a statement. It is used to reinforce a statement by implicating a dual reason for its importance.
"You shouldn't be out alone at night... it's hard to get around with no public transport, not to mention it being dangerous to be on your own..."
Most 'not to mention' additions are logical connections, not false or untrue.
Hello,
I smiled (virtually) and said hello (inferentially/allegedly).
Rules broken? Worth sticking to? A rough guide? Many of us are NOT following a computer algorithm for dharma drones. How about you?
The perfectly useful and skilful unravelling of peoples knots and nots is complicated ... have-not herds of robotic Buddha inhuman lemmings is not part of everyones realistic needs ...
The point is what is useful and pragmatic for you. Need rules (you have provided a good set) - follow them.
HOWEVER (yep I shouted) not everyone works that way. We can be more fluid, more relaxed, why even (dare I say it) imperfect ...
It's true we need to relax, this type of speech makes no grave mistake but being straightforward is something encouraged as mentioned in the Karaniya Metta Sutta, what do you think?
Of all the things that there are to focus on in Buddhist practice, the exact true nature of random phrases seems of minimal importance. There are A LOT of extraneous language features in the English language. If you feel they don't add to the understanding of what you are saying, then don't use them. But I don't think most of them need direct attention to worry about whether a particular phrase fits into Right Speech. If you aren't sure if you should say/write something, then don't. I think you are over thinking a bit. I don't think the way most people use "not to mention" is a huge concern with falling out of Right Speech parameters. I think there are far bigger concerns with how we use our speech than that.
@karasti
Thanks for your reply. That's very true, just like everything in life if doubt then don't do it. But as mentioned previously being straightforward is something encouraged in the practice. Any thought on this?
@NB1100, Could you illustrate what you mean by straightforward? Please give examples and links to such 'encouragments'. Thanks.
Came across this and thought to share this. The use of "not to mention” dates back to at least the 17th century, Milton used it in his “Of Education”. He is a poet and polemicist. While this type of speech might be considered arts or communication skill but I am not sure how should I place this in Buddhist practice.
If you take a look carefully, first paragraph of Karaniya Metta Sutta says:
This is what should be done
By one who is skilled in goodness,
And who knows the path of peace:
Let them be able and upright,
Straightforward and gentle in speech,
Humble and not conceited,
Contented and easily satisfied,
Unburdened with duties and frugal in their ways.
Peaceful and calm and wise and skillful.
But I think it depends on the individual, to me it's not really straightforward, deny a subject at the same time mention the denied subject. It's rather quirky but maybe useful for prose polemicist.
Haven't you got anything more serious to consider? this really is of virtually insignificant relevance...
Besides, I completely fail to see how 'not to mention' in any way contradicts or negates 'straightforward and gentle in speech'...
I think you are creating unnecessary issues for yourself.
Find something more pressing, because honestly? Mountain out of a molehill.
As for thinking ... trying to give it up